Corcoran et al v. CVS Health Corporation

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-03504

Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting CVS's Motions in Limine

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 OAKLAND DIVISION 4 CHRISTOPHER CORCORAN, et al., No. 15-CV-03504-YGR 5 Plaintiffs, 6 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: v. CVS'S MOTIONS IN LIMINE 7 CVS PHARMACY, INC., 8 Defendant. 9 10 On May 5, 2020, CVS Pharmacy, Inc. ("CVS") filed eight motions in limine in the 11 above-captioned action pursuant to the Court's Order Re: Trial Schedule, Dkt. No. 425; Plaintiffs 12 have opposed the motions; and the Court has heard oral argument. 13 The Court, having considered CVS's motions, all papers and evidence submitted in 14 support and in opposition thereto, and the applicable law, hereby enters an Order: 15 1. Barring evidence and argument of the Health Savings Pass ("HSP")-related 16 lawsuits and government investigations identified in footnote 1 to CVS's Motion in Limine #1, 17 pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 401, 402, 403, 408, and 802: 18 Granted ____ Denied ____ Modified _____________________________________ 19 2. Barring evidence and argument that the U&C definitions in the contracts between 20 CVS and the PBMs are clear or unambiguous, pursuant to the law of the case doctrine and 21 Federal Rules of Evidence 402 and 403: 22 Granted ____ Denied ____ Modified _____________________________________ 23 24 3. Barring evidence and argument that CVS and the PBMs conspired or schemed 25 that HSP prices are not U&C prices, pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 402 and 403: 26 Granted ____ Denied ____ Modified _____________________________________ 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CVS'S MOTIONS IN -1- LIMINE, NO. 15-CV-03504-YGR 1 4. Barring evidence and argument concerning the January 29, 2015 contract between 2 CVS and OptumRx, pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 402 and 407: 3 Granted ____ Denied ____ Modified _____________________________________ 4 5 5. Barring Plaintiffs from arguing or implying that CVS's liability may arise from (a) a failure to disclose information to Class Members or (b) any affirmative representation to 6 Class Members concerning the accuracy of their copayments, pursuant to the law of the case 7 doctrine and Federal Rules of Evidence 402 and 403: 8 Granted ____ Denied ____ Modified _____________________________________ 9 10 6. Barring Dr. Joel Hay's opinions that: (a) "HSP prices themselves are the single 11 most common cash prices appearing in the transaction data as many as 52 times more than the 12 next most common cash prices," (b) "the HSP program was broadly available to cash 13 customers," and (c) "the HSP membership fee was nominal," pursuant to Federal Rules of 14 Evidence 402, 403, and 702: 15 Granted ____ Denied ____ Modified _____________________________________ 16 17 7. Barring Dr. Joel Hay from opining specifically as to the definition of usual and 18 customary in the PBM contracts or what CVS and the PBMs intended when including the 19 defined term of U&C price in their contracts, pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 402, 403, 20 and 702: 21 Granted ____ Denied ____ Modified _____________________________________ 22 23 8. Barring the parties from (a) examining CVS's corporate representative on matters outside of the individual's personal knowledge and (b) calling in-house counsel Hillary Dudley 24 as a live trial witness, pursuant to Federal Rules of Evidence 402, 403, and 602: 25 Granted ____ Denied ____ Modified _____________________________________ 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CVS'S MOTIONS IN -2- LIMINE, NO. 15-CV-03504-YGR 1 Dated: ______________ ______________________ 2 Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers United States District Court 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [PROPOSED] ORDER RE: CVS'S MOTIONS IN -3- LIMINE, NO. 15-CV-03504-YGR